You just put together, two things that do not belong together. You said "social gatherings". not "work sponsored event". This is not "workplace hostility", this is guys doing what guys want to do outside of work.

If those guys want to go to strip clubs as part of their "social group", they have every right to do so. Going to work with someone, does not give you the right to dictate what they do outside of work.

Nor does it allow you to force people to be "friendly". you are only entitled to "professional".

Certain people at my work, like to socialize around (particular type of group event). I dont like that kind of activity. I think it's gross. But do I get to tell them, "hey you dont get to go do that stuff because it makes me feel excluded" ?? NO. (PS: I'm not making this up, there really is that sort of thing, but I'm censoring the type of event in case someone at my work reads this and feels offended by it)

In exactly the same way your wife has no right to dictate what her "colleagues" do to socialize. If that means that she feels less "socially connected" to them... well, sorry, but that's not the purpose of what a workplace is for.

This is kind of similar to what I was saying in my prior article, tweaked just slightly: There's a difference between "things women don't like or are interested in", and things that are workplace discriminatory. If her co-workers were all members of a BSDM club, and she wasnt interested in joining them... or if they were bisexual, and enjoyed going to a mixed-gender lineup of strippers... would she have any right to complain? no.

Nor does she have any right to complain in the situation you described, if it is purely a "social gathering" outside of work. Same thing applies to "going and pounding whiskys", or "going out to shooting ranges", etc, etc, etc.

"bad attitude" is a subjective, and almost meaningless term.

There's plenty of things that could fall under the female definition of "bad attitude", that are simply"things women dont like", but ARE NOT IN THEMSELVES SEXIST. It's simply that women dont like them.

For that sort of thing: yes, women who are interested in working there, DO just "need a thicker skin". It's not up to the employeer to make everything potpourri scented and color coordinated just to attract more women.
If any feminazis are actually in favour of this idiocy, then consider what would be a fair counterpoint:

There is a "shortage" of men in Kindergarden through 2nd grade public schools. To address this, we must mandate more "male friendly" workplaces in elementary schools. We now require that the teachers' lounge supply free NFL coverage. Also, to address complaints by men of emotional assault, female employees are forbidden to ask male employees, "So, how does that make you FEEL?"

(satire off)

Any man who wishes to work in the elementary school system, needs to get over the fact that it is dominated by women at the moment, and make adjustments for THEM, rather than expect that the more than 75% majority female staff needs to cater to "male specific needs".

Same applies to women applying to male heavy careers. It's supposed to be about the JOB. Unless the men are specifically *rude* to them, they should get over themselves, or find a different career. The old "I want to work with people" work motivation, only is relevant for tier 1 helpdesk support, not for IT as an actual career. IT is primarily about the tech, not the people, and tech is gender-blind.

Good point. You guys need to go the "webcomic" route. Do virtual concerts. "Pay per view" as it were. Those then become the equivalent of selling hard-copy versions of the comics.

You could have both "live" versions of this thing, but also fancyschmancy "music video" type stuff.

Oh, and sell DVDs, that are specially decorated and branded, of the videos. Some people still like to "collect" stuff. hence all the biz that popular comic artists do, selling autographed books of the comics that people have already seen for free on the web.

and/or hook up with the "cafepress" type vendors, and sell merchandize through da net.

No, it has nothing to do with that, and everything to do with MARKETING. You need huge amounts of MARKETING, to make the movie get big box office. Possibly more amounts of money than the movie production costs. Probably more amounts of time for people getting on talk shows, etc, etc. than it took to shoot the movie.

Aaaand.. why is that a terrible thing? That when people are in possession of something they no longer own, (when they were responsible for "picking it up" for themselves in the first place), they are expected to return it to the rightful owners? Or similarly, that falling in "breech of contract" has consequences?

What you seem to be saying, basically, is, "If you like stealing stuff, dont vote republican".

The implied inverse of that is, if you dont like people stealing stuff, vote Republican.

Works for me.

The key here is "option", or rather, lack thereof. You dont get an option, it's mandatory.

btw, you still have to pay the extra $30 or something, you are looking to avoid paying. family plans, etc. still have a "per device" fee.

Been there, done that. I had huge difficulties going to sleep "early".

From my own experience, I would guess that your issues are mostly a combination of one or more of the following:

1. stress
2. lack of purpose in your life
3. lack of positiveness in your life.

Most important tip:

That doesnt mean it is somehow impossible for you. It means you were doing it wrong, repeatedly.

FYI: I got over my late-night ness, when a combination of things happened:

1. I got older
2. I had children
3. I forcibly had to change my work schedule, and yes my life schedule as well

It's lose-lose.
The main problem is actually the problem with the intelligence of the majority of people (FROM BOTH parties, dont even start with single-party bashing), who "pretty much universally fall prey to marketing".

Give them the vote directly, they will vote for "bread and circuses".

Give them the vote indirectly, and the above de Tocqueville quotation comes into play. But really, that is just a one-level abstracted instance of the "bread and circuses" effect.
(Juvenal, circa AD 100)

It was to counter this effect, that ancient Athens attempted to educate citizens out of "Idiocy". It's interesting to note that originally, "idiot" was a term referring to someone who voted and generally acted in a self-centered manner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot/Idiocy_(Athenian_Democracy)

Then again, almost any system will work well, in a population of only 7 million people .

In comparison, the population of a SINGLE hyper metropolitan area in the US (the "greater los angeles area") is 16 million

San francisco bay area, 7 million

New York`: 8 million

The REAL problem, is that there is this culture-of-inertia acceptance of an "update" button, which almost always brings security "fixes".. COMBINED WITH MORE "features", I mean bugs.

Until vendors start offering more options, there's almost no point in updating, from a security standpoint. You're just posponing your hackability.
Your safest means of protection currently, is to only run java from trusted sites.

Vendors need to offer a "just security patches, NO new feature code" auto-update button.
*especially* the java vendor(s)

paraphrase, "well, we cant actually prove anything, but we're really hopeful that it coulda-shoulda happened!! Partyyyy!"

yeeesh. Go back to undergraduate studies.

The fun thing is, I havent used hulu for some time now; The current shows I watch, are available directly from the networks they come from now (albeit with slightly stupider commercial policies. but I can live with that)

The non-current shows I watch.. I've found they can be found elsewhere as well. Still with occasional commercials. But that's fine, i can live with one or two. Just dont get GREEDY.

oops, too late. bye bye